🎦 Star Trek full movie HD download (J.J. Abrams) - Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi. 🎬
Star Trek
Year:
2009
Country:
USA, Germany
Genre:
Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
IMDB rating:
8.0
Director:
J.J. Abrams
Chris Pine as Captain James T. Kirk, retired
Zachary Quinto as Captain Spock
Leonard Nimoy as Captain Spock
Eric Bana as Nero
Bruce Greenwood as Capt. Christopher Pike
Karl Urban as Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy
Zoe Saldana as Captain Nyota Uhura
Simon Pegg as Capt. Montgomery "Scotty" Scott
John Cho as Captain Hikaru Sulu
Anton Yelchin as Commander Pavel Chekov
Ben Cross as Ambassador Sarek
Winona Ryder as Amanda
Chris Hemsworth as George Kirk
Jennifer Morrison as Winona Kirk
Storyline: On the day of James Kirk's birth, his father dies on his ship in a last stand against a mysterious alien time-traveling vessel looking for Ambassador Spock, who, in this time, is also a child on Vulcan disdained by his neighbors for his half-human heritage. Twenty-five years later, Kirk has grown into a young troublemaker. Challenged by Captain Christopher Pike to realize his potential in Starfleet, he comes to annoy instructors like young Commander Spock. Suddenly, there is an emergency at Vulcan and the newly commissioned USS Enterprise is crewed with promising cadets like Nyota Uhura, Hikaru Sulu, Pavel Chekov and even Kirk himself, thanks to Leonard McCoy's medical trickery. Together, this crew will have an adventure in the final frontier where the old legend is altered forever as a new version of it begins.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x800 px 1534 Mb h264 1690 Kbps mp4 Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x480 px 2384 Mb mpeg4 2627 Kbps mp4 Download
iPhone 480x200 px 665 Mb mpeg4 732 Kbps mp4 Download
Reviews
Awesome - highly recommend
I was one of the few lucky fans who attended the Sydney premiere and my impression was "Wow!" The use of a well known Roddenberry plot device to reset the franchise was a brilliant idea and means the franchise can now move forward without the "FANS" shouting "canon!" The movie itself was brilliantly cast and performed with each actor being enough like the original to be believable in the role without the over the top acting that was part of TV when it all began in the 1960's.The special effects are top notch.

Its a film which you can take anyone who enjoys sci-fi to, not just someone who knows the last 40+ years of Trek.

So what level of fan am I? I own 3 costumes, attend conventions and appear in "Trekkies 2", and yet loved Enterprise because from the first episode I simply said its was in an alternate universe, its the same but different. I view this film in the same light, same but different.
2009-04-10
Bad movie yes. But not because of what everyone else say.
Maybe I'm wrong. I just type what I think. Here it is:

One conversation between Picard and data or Kirk and Spock is more insightful and thought provoking than all American movies produced for the last eight years. Since 9/11 directors are not allowed to make smart movies any more. Actually they only make propaganda films like in world war 2. But the problem is that those films are smart and thought provoking and inspire people even today.

Some powerful people are making the job of their enemies for them. Making the American people dumper. How can anyone believe that Kirk's actions would earn him something other than a kick out of the academy in any reality that such a benevolent institution exist? How can someone abandon a crew mate on a frozen monster infested planet. How can someone linger next to a black hole and fire all weapons on a dying ship endangering his own ship? Because it looks cool? It that what they want to teach? If American boys go to war with mentality like that will they accomplice anything? They'll just going to get killed. Actually all the characters are petty and cruel and act stupidly. Even the last security guard. Is J.J. Abrams that dump? No. he is told to make it that way.

You think that J.J. does not know that the Romulans can warn their people in the past or does not know all the other unbelievable plot holes? He made the movie. And to be fair all of Star Trek had huge plot holes most of all TOS. The plot was always the means to make a philosophical or technological point. Witch here is obviously non existent.

Just like The Vulcan councilman insults his best student (Spock) in front of everybody with no reason and loses him that is how they insult the audience with no reason and loose them.

The point is propaganda films don't need to be stupid and sure as heck don't need to be stupid when they are based on Star Trek. How can you help people protect them selves from terrorist or any treats? By making them dumper and scared or smart and informed?

This is not Star Trek don't compare it with Star Trek. Its nothing. Only Gene Roddenberry can make star trek and he is dead. what he made he made and that is Star Trek.

But there is a good think to come out of it. Peoples attention will be drawn to the Real Star Trek and maybe they'll learn something.

And if you materialize in a sealed tube filed with water you will die. It is worse than materializing in a wall.
2009-05-16
Star Trek made into Star Dreck
I was a fairly dedicated fan of the 60's TV show (but not really the new series or the previous theatrical movies). However I was pretty disappointed in the envisioning of the new generation's star trek directed by JJ Abrams. The whole movie seems to be no better than a SCI-FI channel movie with bigger special effects.

There are too many plot holes to go into. The movie barely held together, nothing really worked well story-wise. The guy who played the young Spock was okay, but that was really the only noteworthy performance in the whole damn thing. Everybody else sucks. There were a couple of slightly decent action scenes, but the fight at the end was surprisingly lame and badly done. It was shockingly bad.

There's a cameo by Leonard Nimoy, but absent is the original TV series star, amazing William Shatner. He's nowhere to be found here, to his credit.
2009-06-06
Why does everyone like this movie?
I'm not gonna go on here, there's no point. I just want to point out that everyone is so enamored with this ridiculous movie. OK the acting is great, no doubt. But the childish simplicity of the, they're over looking the obvious, which is that the story is insultingly dumb. And why has no one sunk their teeth in to the fact that this whole movie basically nullifies the whole original series.

That's right it's Dallas all over again! TOS, TNG, DS9 all just some crazy dream in another dimension. I'm no trekkie, but surely that can't sit well on the stomachs of the older fans. Wait do we even care about them?

Oh dear, they decided not to bother with an intelligent look into the building relationships of the characters. No, will just skip over that, and go straight into some more time traveling nonsense so we can put Lenard Nimoy in the film. And then to give the 'past' characters technology not even conceived in the 'future' shows... come on, how can anyone defend this film?

That being said, go and watch it for the brilliance of Simon Pegg and Karl Urban!
2009-05-25
Few redeeming characteristics - Trashes Gene Roddenbury's vision
I had arrived at this movie with high hopes after having heard a favorable review by a friend. It turns out that my friend was giving a favorable review of his date, I am quite sure that he paid no attention to the movie, because anyone watching this filth that owns half a brain could not possibly enjoy it.

Right out of the gate, they Jump the Shark on the Spock character turning him into an impulsive, brash, horny Vulcan youth with a heart full of angst. Then they turn Kirk into a stone-jawed loudmouth playboy from a Michael Bay style Cars-n'-Sluts flick, complete with multiple pointless car chases, hopeless henchmen, comedic extras and sweaty bar fights over girls.

There's no character depth or development as suddenly all the characters from the series are thrown together in their twenties starting off as geniuses at each of their respective tasks, as if no one with promise has to rise through ranks, earn knowledge or hone talent to become something. That uniquely American perspective coupled with the tiresome oversexualization or alternatively, casting-into-comedic roles of every single character, followed by constant mindless action sequences drags the script of this movie below the Canned-Tuna quality we see in all the Star Wars prequels. It even comes complete with hoverbikes and giant digitized monster chases.

What happened to the cerebral and highly character-driven plots that Star Trek has come to be known for? Why pollute an otherwise acceptable premise with silly fantasy elements and spoil a carefully thought out universe with a tired old Deus Ex Machina like time travel through black holes? It never came together, and I got really sick of the constantly switching camera angles and lens flare; I felt like I was skydiving during a thunderstorm for the entire movie. Star Trek would have been better as an amusement ride like Star Tours at Disneyland than something seen in a Theatre.
2009-05-18
Star Trek Movie
Action movie yes - Star Trek movie No. This film takes the Star Trek universe and basically wipes the entire canon out so we can have Uhura as a bimbo and Spock as a emotion controlled moron. The essence of Star Trek was destroyed by the movie. Gone is the Star Trek that the fans loved and in its place is 90210 or Bimbos in space.

The plot was used to rewrite the entire Star Trek universe, gone is Next gen, DS9 and voyager. What is next the Klingons appear and instead of being great warriors, they are the great worriers and feeble little guys.

Abrams should be thrown out an airlock for this crap
2009-05-07
How did the writing for this get to the screen?
To start with, I should say that I am not a "Trekkie" - I am aware of the characters broadly and have even watched some episodes and previous movies, but am not an aficionado nor a big fan. I had seen the shorts for this movie and following a young Kirk looked excellent and it appeared to be a rollicking action film.

So, to start with the good:

* Casting was superb, as was the acting. I felt the actors embodied the feeling of the series and carried out their part in the script flawlessly. * Action scenes were well choreographed and were enjoyable. * Production quality, as you would expect, was high - the movie certainly looked very slick, and I particularly like the start with Iowan farm showing massive star-scrapers in the background. * First scenes were good, with Kirk entering the academy.

The bad:

* Suspension of disbelief is severely taxed - I can take "red matter" and other plot elements at face value, but had a real problem taking a lot of other things as such. * We are dealing with an alternate history, but the idea that 25 years of altered history has lead all of the main characters in Star Trek to exactly the same points beggars belief! * There are 430 crew on board the ship, however recent military graduates end up running the entire ship? There is one old guy in the crew and the rest all come from military college - and they didn't even graduate? * Crew was assigned to a new space ship with no time or effort being put towards shaking down the ship nor the crew? * The command bridge of the vessel seems to be a social lounge, where anyone - including civilians can saunter onto * A mining vehicle - even one from 129 years into the future - has sufficient technology that it can destroy an entire fleet of warships - even whilst tethered to a planet and unable to move * The protagonist (Nero) was barely even a one dimensional character - he was simply angry * A mining ship has a huge internal volume for some reason that is fully pressurised and heated * A spaceship that becomes a singularity suddenly has enough mass to drag in the Enterprise (this one is a physics geek quibble admittedly...)

The ugly:

* The writing was just lazy - kirk is ejected out onto an ice planet by Spock - and this is supposed to be in some way logical? ARRGGGHHH!!! * My guess is the writers were hamstrung - they were given a brief where they had to tailor the story in a two hour time-frame so that we could have the old crew in charge of the starship Enterprise to facilitate the corporate requirements of big business movie making - hence the reason why so many of the plot elements make no sense.

At the end of this movie, I was looking forward to the end - just to make it stop! I found it quite frustrating dealing with plot holes you could drive a Mac truck through!

No doubt, now that they have the crew together, the next story they will release can be more self consistent.

Perhaps you just need to be a Trekkie to enjoy this one?
2009-05-12
One of the most retarded films to come out for ages!!
I'm sorry but this film is terrible! Anyone that thinks it is truly a great film is either a retard or has no idea what the original Star Trek was about. Star Trek was always about great story lines with cool deep characters that have humility and pure hearts. The crew of star trek are intelligent and gentle and have to cope with complex situations and ideas. This new Star Trek is basically just completely the same as all the major blockbusting films like Transformers and Quantum of Solace, it has a very small simple yet ambiguous story line which is totally pointless, bringing time travel into any story line generally means the writer couldn't think of a real story line so using time travel could stretch out a very simple revenge tale into something much more retarded. I would have liked to have some clever twists in the story or interesting dialogue but no! We are just given the same arrogant smirky one liners and pointless conversations as Transfomers and all the other retarded films coming out that have to rely on CGI for their thrills... This film is shallow and totally unconvincing and makes me wonder if anybody making the film actually liked the original Star Trek, if they did why would they make it into a messy childish roller-coaster ride with so many flaws and unexplained convenient plot twists. I think the director and actors are too young to really understand the Star Trek series and turned it into something they could appreciate. This film is on par with Micheal Bay films its basically another Independence Day!! I feel sorry for the original author of Star Trek he must be turning in his grave... 1/10...
2009-06-03
Star Trek for Dummies meets Jonas Brothers: My review from grog.ca
Spoiler alert: There's big red goo that you really shouldn't know about, and lots more below. So there, you've been warned.

After seeing this flick in IMAX last night, I knew I felt uneasy (and it wasn't just the random chunk of dirt being projected onto the huge screen) but I had to sleep on this one.

Many of the original Star Trek episodes were written by the leading science fiction authors of the time, and they dealt with issues like geopolitics, arms race, cultural divide, and, yes, even some science.

This film was brought to you by the guy who brought us that hopelessly lost TV show Lost.

During the movie, all I could see in my mind's eye was the writers' meetings.

"We need something that can blow-up a planet. Trekkies know that Spock planet, right ? Pon Far, I saw it last night on the old Trek DVDs they forced me to watch. Let's blow it up !"

"How about a black hole, boss..."

"Perfect. Now we need something to make a black hole."

"Well, scientists have speculated on something called Dark Matter..."

"Dark ? We're making a movie here. Make it red ! A huge red ball of goo."

Sure, it could be said that the Genesis Device in Wrath of Khan was a similar dramatic device, but at least they properly set that one up for those of us who aren't so willing to suspend disbelief when watching sci-fi.

Later, my mind reeled back to the conference room when it seemed that Abrams was shoehorning Nimoy and the Scotty character into the kludgey red sludge of a movie:

"OK how about Spock shoots Kirk onto an ice planet with big ice monsters, and old Spock happens to be in a cave waiting there to help him out."

"Umm, OK boss..."

"And then they walk down the hill and there's a Federation station, and they meet Scotty there. Why is Scotty there..."

"How about he transported an Admiral's dog into space doing an experiment ?"

"Perfect ! PETA won't even notice. Oh and throw an Ewok onto the station."

"But boss that's the wrong..."

"Do it ! OK now onto Earth. Great job guys, we're almost done and we've left a pile of plot holes for the next movies to deal with, muhahaha !"

Was it worth watching ? Maybe, I need to see it again in the comfort of my living room to figure that one out (my screen might not be 4 stories high but my projector doesn't have any dead pixels or flecks of dirt to constantly distract). But so far I think I've just witnessed Star Trek for Dummies meets those 80s albums where kids sang rock songs, and I'm pretty sure neither of those are up my alley.
2009-05-10
Money Talks, of Course. Anyone Surprised??
1) McCoy goes into an "alternative" past, marries a Vulcan woman and then Spock is born; 2) In another "alternative past", The "red matter", when manipulated in very small amounts in a quantum-related time-space, will permit that the Enterprise computer voice can procreate. Then, the voice and Spock give birth to Nomad (TOS). which by his turn mates with V'Ger (ST:The Movie), and the two enters into a black hole, carrying with them all the known universe. Well, time to reboot again... It's not that difficult to create options. (sarcasm intended)

About the performers, a hats off to Mr. Greenwood, a classic actor, always good and solid.

And the thing goes on and on and on, new gadgets, books, can be created and sold, etc. I'm not a trekker or trekkie, whatever, but, yes, a longtime and errr..."serious" fan of the series, since I was a child. TOS is still the best, by far, followed by TNG. Of course, this new movie is - only for market purposes - a 'Star Trek' one. They call ST a franchise, right? franchise is about profits, money. As another reviewer wrote, I suggest to those still with a brain in reasonable condition: leave it in the front door, in case you insist to watch this expensive nonsense. In an ideal world, it would be great if these Hollywood 'geniuses' leave the iconic works of the past stay at their own (recent catastrophic sequels or remakes including X-Files, The Day The Earth Stood Still, etc). Comparing the latest available Star Trek efforts, any Star Trek Phase II movie is better than this one. ST Phase II has passion and guts, also good and coherent stories IMHO. Give them a try.
2009-05-10
📹 Star Trek full movie HD download 2009 - Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Leonard Nimoy, Eric Bana, Bruce Greenwood, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho, Anton Yelchin, Ben Cross, Winona Ryder, Chris Hemsworth, Jennifer Morrison, Rachel Nichols - USA, Germany. 📀
×